Scrap the IMCR

[Pace]

10540

using your arguement would mean that you could never prove that an accident was caused by insufficient training either with an IMCR or an IR.
Of course any accident is usually pilot error whether it be to an IR pilot or IMCR pilot or even a VFR pilot.

All you can look at is whether the pilot is suitably trained and competant to be flying in certain conditions and whether more training could have helped avoid the accident that occured.

I think a confusion here lies between the training standards and the experience gained to bring a pilot to a level of competancy as well as natural ability.

I am sure you would not advocate a new PPL getting an IMCR and then heading off in any weather? a low time PPL who aquires an IR would be better equipt to fly off in poor weather but in both cases it is subsequent experience built over time which makes a pilot safe to do so.
That usually involves self imposed limits by the PPL which are loosened as the PPL gains more experience and feels more comfortable and capable.

To fly IFR in controlled airspace requires that the pilot is trained to a certain standard and is able to demonstrate his ability to fly to that standard and tolerances.

The freshly IMCR trained pilot would not be able to fly to the standards and tolerances required for the IR both JAA or FAA and that should answer this arguement.

Training and experience are two different things and maybe EASA should look more at experience in issuing a more attainable PPL IR.
Ie after the issuance of an IMCR a set amount of logged P1 instrument flying out of controlled airspace before any allowances are made on the normal IR route?

But I very much doubt anything will be done other than sympathetic burps amidst tea and biscuit chats.

Pace